On Friday 01 November 2002 06:35, Joseph Watson wrote:
Hello,
I have a question about two way traffic, and how to shape it?
Lets say we want to limit a customer usage to 256kbit total. So on my
firewall I add shaping rules to the client side nice with a ceiling of
256kbit. Now I also want
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Alexey Sheshka wrote:
Hi!
$iptables -A OUTPUT -t mangle -p tcp -s 0/0 --sport 80 -d 192.168.15.129 -j MARK
--set-mark 10
This will only mark packets from your HTTP server (*localhost*) going to
192.168.15.129 (the client) . Is that what you mean?
Ethy H. Brito
the point is that ipac do the measuring with iptables
C
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002 18:06:09 -0800, Kenneth Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
--On Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:13 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i've installed mrtg to make graphics of the trafic from the interfece
throw the snmpd,
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002 09:56:36 +0100, Stef Coene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
said:
On Friday 01 November 2002 03:06, Kenneth Porter wrote:
--On Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:13 PM + [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
i've installed mrtg to make graphics of the trafic from the interfece
throw the snmpd,
Hi everyone,
I was wondering if those of you in the know could give me a brief
comparison about Cisco's CAR compared with Linux's traffic shaping
solution, particularly HTB and ESFQ which I am using now with great
success.
The reason I am asking is that I anticipate within the coming months I
try, I can't find
out what the new syntax should be. Here's the line that's failing:
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 13
Any ideas how to make that work with the new version?
You have to use the same htb version for tc and the kernel.
Maybe that's the
problem.
Oops, pardon me for partially answering my own questions, but let me clarify:
1. I read the bit of the FAQ on docum.org that explains the quantum stuff. Nice site
Stef. So it looks to me that in HTB3 if your quantum is less than the packet size,
since it still sends the packet anyways, it's
On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 10:29:19AM -0500, Tim Carr wrote:
try, I can't find
out what the new syntax should be. Here's the line that's failing:
You have to use the same htb version for tc and the kernel.
Maybe that's the
problem.
Hmm. I'm using debian's stock version of iproute2's
On Friday 01 November 2002 16:43, Tim Carr wrote:
Oops, pardon me for partially answering my own questions, but let me
clarify:
1. I read the bit of the FAQ on docum.org that explains the quantum stuff.
Nice site Stef. So it looks to me that in HTB3 if your quantum is less
than the packet
Lets say we want to limit a customer usage to 256kbit total.
That is, you want to limit upload+download.
Whether or not it can be done, I think it's worth pointing out that
this is nonsense. It makes sense to allocate A+B only if A and B can
be used to replace each other. Upload and Download
You have to compare the highes and the lowest rate you have.
You have to
choose r2q so the lowest-rate / r2q 1500 and highest-rate /
r2q 6.
You can specify the r2q parameter if you add the htb qdisc.
Ok, I specified the r2q as 2, and now here's my HTB:
-
Note that all my quantums are now 1500 and 60k. Does everything here
look ok?
Yes.
Will the rates be more accurate now that quantum isn't 1000?
Yes and you will see no complains anymore in your logging.
How
do I make pretty graphical pictures like you guys did, to tell how well it
is
Could someone clue me in as to what exactly the following tc keywords do:
allot
cell
weight
maxburst
avpkt
Thanks,
Daniel
___
LARTC mailing list / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/
--On Friday, November 01, 2002 09:51:28 PM +0100 Stef Coene
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bandwidth is the maximum bandwidth of the device where the queue is
attached. This can be a NIC or a class from another qdisc. For a
root-qdisc, the bandwidth has to be the same as the bandwidth of the
device
14 matches
Mail list logo
